Dan Radcliffe on Harry Potter Book Purists and Fans of the Films


Jan 10, 2009

Posted by SueTLC

The Australian Herald Sun has released a new interview with Dan Radcliffe, where the Harry Potter gives his thoughts about the upcoming Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, and the two Deathly Hallows films. Of HBP he says he thinks they have struck a type of balance between the darker, intensity found in the sixth book and a bit of humor. Dan says “I mean, the one thing when I read the script I could always yearn
for was more darkness and more of that real intense stuff, because I
enjoy doing that more, but hopefully this time we have struck a balance
between that darkness and a certain comedy in this film. “And what I think we’ve managed to do is not make it that kind of comedy that is farcical and pulling faces.
“It’s not that kind of comedy at all, it’s much more subtle than
that and hopefully people will find it funny – that’s the aim anyway.”

Of particular interest are Dan Radcliffe’s comments on the the two Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows films, and book purists feelings about the Harry Potter films. Quotage: “I think when the fans came on to the first film there would have
been a section of the audience that didn’t want to like it because they
were the purists of the book,” he says.
“There are still those people out there, but you are never going to change their minds so just don’t even try.

I think the majority of the people out there, because the fan base has
grown at about the rate the films have come out, we’ve managed to keep
making them darker and dark enough to maintain the interests of these

“And I think actually through making the films darker
we’ve gained a lot. And also through people like (director) David Yates
directing them, a certain amount of respect has been gained for the
films as cinema.”

82 Responses to Dan Radcliffe on Harry Potter Book Purists and Fans of the Films

Avatar Image says: Oh Dan...as always you are just too eloquent Avatar Image says: I think, from what I've seen of the trailers, that this film will be more of a dark/funny mix, but they do say that about every movie, so its hard to tell. Avatar Image says: Yep I agree with Dan. The films are getting darker and I'm glad they kept the comedy in. :)Avatar Image says: I noticed that about the book too. It has the perfect balance of darkness and comedy. H-BP was the funniest book by far. The whole Ron/Hermione/Lavander triangle is hillarious!!! And how Hermione tries to make Ron jelouse by using McLaggan. So funny!!! best book out of the series. Oh and I can't wait for all the H/G stuff!!!Avatar Image says: Dan's spot on about the book purists, many of whom frequent fan sites such as this one. They'll never be satisfied with the movie adaptions but instead of sticking to the books, they watch them because it gives them the excuse to whinge and complain. Avatar Image says: Haha,, Thats scary i'm watching Most Haunted Live! And Just went on muggle net and read this article then came on leaky and it was on here which freaked me out! my mom said i should write in to Most Haunted and tell them they're interupting my potter news! Haha But i like the films dark with a few hidden laughs that mostly fans would understand :D x x xAvatar Image says: I'm a book purist, but I learned one rule from Harry Potter that applies to any book-to-movie adaption: The movie is not the book, and therefore will not be exactly the same. It's a different medium, and "creative liberties" are bound to be taken. The movie won't diminish the book in any way, and may get more people to read the original, so just enjoy it for what it is.Avatar Image says: Very true redwall_hp. I totally agree. I like the books and I like the movies, but books are movies are two different mediums of entertainment and can't be the exact same. Dan is so great and he seems really thoughtful about these types of things. I'm happy that the films are getting darker in a sort of lead up to the final film!Avatar Image says: The HBP has high potential to be the best movie of the lot up to this point. I do love the balance of comedy and tragedy in HBP. I laughed out loud and cried reading the same book. Daniel is so thoughtful on the films. I know he's ready to devote everything and more to HP 7. Avatar Image says: Dan is very clued up about the HP film business and their audience. As usual he demonstrates a lot of intelligent thought in his opinions. I think he summed up the "purist" section of the audience pretty well although I think he might be a bit harsh in saying they go in "not wanting to like it". Some do, actually. But that's a very small minority, most purists are simply very hard to please if they are wanting an absolute faithful interpretation. Some fans, through no fault of their own are just not knowledged enough about book to film adaptations to realise it is nigh on impossible to create an absolute faithful adaptation without losing an entertaining narrative flow. I wont be surprised if Dan eventually becomes a film director or producer later. He's got so much energy and enthusiasm for the whole film making craft. He seems to like dark a lot though, so he might turn out quite depressing films!Avatar Image says: Haha...after seeing him play Alan Strang a few times, Daniel is definitely not afraid of the Dark side! Avatar Image says: Oh I love Daniel Radcliffe........Im excited about the sixth one being a bit more funny, I have already seen some of the funny parts in the trailer! HPB better meet the standards of the book.Avatar Image says: I'm really excited for hbp! However, even dan said he wanted it to be darker... which I do, but I like the fact that he said it's not pulling faces comedy romance, because in the trailers it looked like that and I didn't find it funny. Avatar Image says: i love how dan has embraced the fact that the book purists will never be swayed :) lol but REAL fans of the series respect the books and the films as two COMPLETELY different things (just like JKR). Avatar Image says: Yeah, I think we're lucky to have both. Both are great and fun and special. The movies are very well done and they bring in more HP book readers who eventually fall in love with the whole series. Nothing wrong with that. Avatar Image says: I appreciate the fact that they are completely different and i hink that makes my like them more because as i read the books i imagine the whole harry potter world exactly as i did when i first read the books. So the film adaptation doesn't affect the books to me and i love both of them :D xxxAvatar Image says: I am glad to hear there's plenty of darkness in HBP. I think the PG rating made some of us a bit nervous that the dark parts had been cut out and that the intense parts had been "kiddified," though it does sound like they've got a good adaptation. However, those of us who like the books and prefer that the movies be true to them are most certainly real fans, so I hope we can avoid that kind of rhetoric around here! I think the majority of us fully realize every last thing can't be included and that some things have to be consensed; i think my main problem has been the short shrift the endings have gotten in movies 3-5, not that every last line a character uttered in the book didn't make it to the movie. So long as every effort is made to keep in the crucial parts and not cut things at the expense of non-book scenes the director/screenwriter wants to include, I'm happy.Avatar Image says: I do think they do a nice job with humour in the movies. A lot of the humour in the books is written in a way that won't translate; which I love. Yes, I'm a book purist and I'll always love the books best and I always hope they put more of the books into the movies; but I enjoy the movies for what they are; much like many of the commenters here. And he's right- don't try to tell us new movie stuff is better than book stuff. : )Avatar Image says: Yeah, I definitely see the books and the movies as COMPLETELY different, but it is so refreshing to be reassured of how dedicated Dan is to the movies. Though he is not my own Harry, he makes a fine movie-Harry, and I am so very looking forward to seeing the balance between humor and tragedy in HBP!Avatar Image says: @GinaC, those are my feelings, exactly. I do think Dan is very tuned into both the films and the books, and the various fan reactions. He has certainly demonstrated a desire to make his role in the movies the best he is personally capable of and you can't ask for more than that. I'm very happy for him that he has been able to branch out to other roles and will continue to grown and develop as an actor, but I am also very glad he IS, and will always be, Harry Potter. Avatar Image says: I bought my wife a T-shirt that sums it all up nicely: Never Judge a Book by it's Movie Avatar Image says: I think that Dan gave a fantastic interview. It's true that we often complain about what's different between the movies and films, and while there are jarring differences that we have a right to complain about, ("harry-did-you-put-your-name-in-the-goblet-of-fire," anyone?) I think that we do need to recognize that movies are an art form just like writing, and sometimes to be able to reach people, they have to change canon. I'm also really excited for the movie... I saw the trailers, and I laughed rally hard at the "I AM the chosen one," and the "Sir, after all this time, I think I'll just go with it" parts. That's the way it should be. They are teenagers, after all. Radish :)Avatar Image says: Spot on, radish_earrings!! I'm definitely a book purist, and there have been a few times when I've said "No way, I'm not going to see the next movie," but then I went and saw them anyways. I think one and two were good, three was terrible, four was okay, and I actually think five was the best one so far, besides the fact that SO much was cut out. But I am really excited about HBP, and I think even if I weren't I'd go see it simply because I'm so impressed with the way Dan, Rupert, Emma and the others have developed as actors and put so much of themselves into their amazing characters.Avatar Image says: Hmm.. Re: purists vs movie lovers.. Purists have to realize that what reads well doesn't necessarily translate to film all that well. That and the extreme difficulty of deciding what sub-plots must be cut in order to make a move short enough to watch comfortably. I will say without hesitation that I enjoyed reading the books more than watching the movies, but that may just be me. There are those HP fans that may find reading a chore and prefer film. They're still fans. I've just recently discovered audio books. Not that they are a new medium. I recall listening to "Call of the Wild" and "White Fang" with my (sightless) grandfather on talking books too many years ago to mention. I've found listening to Seven Fry or Jim Dale is a hoot. yup, If you're a fan, you're a fan. It matters not whether you prefer the print or the film. I am waiting impatiently for the release of HBP, and I really, really want to see the two parter DH. Now back to the ?th reread of the Bloomsbury version. Now on OoTP.. Love it all. OMTAvatar Image says: I have no Idea what happened above. I hit submit only one time. Wierd. Moderator, feel free to axe it if you wish... OMTAvatar Image says: I also think he's got it right. I do love the books and the details, but I understand that the films cannot include everything. I do enjoy the darker parts of the books, so I'm glad that those parts are being recognized more as the films go on. I'm glad Dan Radcliffe is so in tune to and seems to enjoy Harry Potter so much. From previous interviews, I get the impression he is very serious about making the Deathly Hallows adaption the best yet (he's actually going to be on Conan O'Brien this Monday - or, I guess technically it's Tuesday since it's at 12:30 a.m., but they still call it Monday night's show).Avatar Image says: I agree with Dan's distaste for the word "blockbuster" being applied to HP. Blockbuster implies some action-packed, special-effects laden film that is short on substance. But instead of special effects, the HP films rely on strong characterization and clever interplay between magic and the regular world. Not some blockbuster spectacle. Oh and the books are way better. No contest.Avatar Image says: I think there's a fine line between something being a decent or even great adaptation from a book, and still not being spot on... I for one love the books more - I saw the first two movies and wasn't very impressed. Now that I've read the books, I enjoy even those two because it all fits together. I don't expect the movies to stick to the books, but I expect the spirit of it to be right having read the books previously. And they do - there may still be a few moments where you've got to laugh because of the way things get changed, but without spending a 5 hour miniseries on each book you're never going to convince me that somethign is a really great adaptation of ANY book (seriously I think the only adaptation of a book I have ever completely approved of is the 5 hour miniseries version of Pride and Prejudice...there's just not enough time in anything shorter to do ANY book true justice) but that doesn't mean the movies aren't valuable as their own thing. (And trust me - I am the sort who likes to tear things apart on movies - but I don't with Harry Potter because it is done well enough... unlike things that make me really snarky...like the movie version of the Phantom of the Opera, lol)Avatar Image says: It is refreshing that Daniel doesn't get caught up in all the pressure. He's so mature, serious and respectful of the material and the process and just does his job, but he can also explore and challenge himself as an actor. An intelligent young man and a perfect anchor for the HP movies. All the actors have handled this whole thing beautifully and I imagine will do so until the end. Avatar Image says: Heyyy.. Dan Luv U n eagerly waiting for ur next movie.Its interesting to know that it includes the comedy side too. Avatar Image says: You know, I always found it strange how Daniel says he prefers doing the dark stuff, yet he wants to do a musical. Quite a contradiction! (Well I know theres a few dark musicals like Sweeney Todd but you know what I mean)Avatar Image says: This article seems to have gotten many things wrong. For instance: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince sees Potter return for his sixth year at Hogwarts where he discovers a book that seemingly explains the past that will help him battle with Lord Voldemort. There is also emerging romantic confusion of mid-adolescence involving Hermione Granger (played by Emma Watson) and the usual array of strange beasts and magic. Also, it lists the 2005 release date of the book instead of the movie release date, which is one calendar day later.Avatar Image says: im from australia and so woke up this morning with my dad shoving the newspaper under my nose because he knows how much i love hp. there is also a bit in the article that has dan stating how important it was to make the final movie a two part saga because unlike other books there were no subplots and so you couldn't leave anything out. He mentioned how in GoF the writers could cut out the whole houselves SPEW plot ( though i think the paper misquoted him as they called it "households"), but i have to disagree with what dan was saying because having the writers cut SPEW what's going to be hermione's reason for kissing ron in DH because like jo once said it was due to ron finally understanding SPEW that hermione could let her guard down and go in for the snog. so i reckon there are some subplots that are kind of necessary in the books as well as the movies!Avatar Image says: There are actually a lot of dark musicals. Don't let the cheerfull singing distract you. More realistic musicals like RENT are much darker than you might think when you hear the music. Dark isn't just about murders like in sweeney todd, it's more about the mental state in wich the characters are.Avatar Image says: Brilliant surprise to read that interview in the paper today!! The Herald Sun seriously has a man-crush on Dan, never says a word against him!! Avatar Image says: David - The release date is correct. Here in Australia movies are released on Thursdays, not Fridays. We receive the movie a day before the US and the UK. Avatar Image says: gente eu sou brasileira falo portugues nao entende nada disso ai v6 tem que colocar opçoes de escolher em ingles portugues espanhol e etc... mais fala a verdade o DAN e lindo?Avatar Image says: I'm not a "book purist", but I am disappointed at how the filmmakers are inventing action sequences that are not in the books--reference the Christmas Burrow Attack in HBP film. Maybe when the films are done, and a few years have gone by, the BBC could produce a television series--perhaps 13 hour long episodes a year for 10 years--that would allow for all the subplots that enrich the main story of Harry vs. Voldemort to be explored in a visual medium. Look at what the BBC did with the new Doctor Who series, for example.Avatar Image says: First, 'Hi Professor! Long time no "see"! LOL. I think you have it right. Dan is a very insightful person. He sees "both sides" of the Fanbase, and is in "touch" with the books, and the fans. I am so glad that, the "comedy" aspect, of HBP has been brought out, in this interview. I think that most everyone, especially after the trailer and the "But I AM the "chosen one" moment, will understand now. "It's not the farcical pulling faces kind of comedy" This movie is going to be great. I am hoping there will be more of the "levity", as it will help "temper" the darker aspects of the film. Avatar Image says: Its a reunion today ...hi Prof P, Lemon F, and Conf Lady (and anyone i may have missed in my quick scan...) Professionaly, I do a lot that involves comparing film to print media (usually novels and plays). For me, the issue of films not being exactly like the books/plays (whether we are talking HP or any other source), since by the time we reach early adolesence we should be able to understand the difference between film and print (and other mediums) For me the issue is plot continuity and completeness. If a crucial plot segment gets left out, then the entire film leaves the audience baffled. And in each HP film some thing has been left out (OotP being the one with the most plot gaps), leaving me wondering how those will be filled in a sensible and seamless manner.... I would add that the early films were rushed into production to cash in on HP-frenzy, and without having the seven novels completed...that made plot omissions in the films even more likely to happen. Now, in fairness, I would point out that I thought "Winky" would show up somewhere toward the end of the series and "do something heroic and important" --I was surprised that her character was totally omitted from the GoF filming. On the other hand, as we as fans discussed here on TLC long ago, it was pretty obvious Dobby would reappear...yet he too was omitted from GoF, Ootp and apparently from HBP as well, creating the very sort of plot line gap that I refer to above. Does it matter? Nope, we'll still go to the films, we'll still buy the dvds......and enjoy them for what they are, the "book purists vs film fans" is a false issue, i think --tho it still amazes me that there are film fans who have never read the books.Avatar Image says: I personally have not been a fan of the movies. I love the sets they are dead on to what I imagine when I read the books. The actors Emma Watson is dead on Hermione. Rupert Grint was fantastic in the first two films the other films so far he is very hit or miss, and he needs a hair cut. books four on really suggest Ron has short hair, Molly Weelsey dose not like long hair on her sons. Bill GOF Charlie DH. Dan Radclif he has improved every movie. Allen Rickman as Snape omg dead on thats Snape. Maggie Smith Again dead on. Michael Gabon as Dumbledore, has he not read the books. His best Dumbledore was in POA. He got Dumbledore since there is no warmth or humor. But my biggest gripe is with WB there unwillingness to let the movies be as long as they need to be. They leave out important content ie In GOF they left out the parting of ways. Just imagine how incredible these movies would be if Peter Jackson one or all of them. If Jo is happy with the films now. Peter Jackson would bring her to tears and give her chills. He could merge book and film and book perfectly. But that just my opinion. I will still go to midnight release of the films and I will buy the movies on dvd. I might not see the move in theaters more than once.Avatar Image says: hp_is_effing_awesome, I think the fact that he enjoys playing that dark part of the books doesn't contradicts the fact that he would like to do a musical. Actors like to do different things, just because he likes to do a certain thing doesn't mean he shouldn't try doing other different stuff too. I've realized he is quite versatile and could play very different roles. Also, for what I've read, he really enjoyed having the opportunity to have more comedy in HBP. In my opinion it was about time Kloves gave Harry some comedy! I have to agree about the book purists, I've been a HP fan since the first movie came out and there are still people who don't want to understand that a book and a movie are 2 different things and it doesn't make sense to compare them in the too detailed way they do. One thing is to miss something from the book, Dan himself have said some of the scenes he has missed watching in the film, like the scene at the end of OotP when Harry and Dumbledore talk in his office. But that's one thing and to try to copare every page of the book with the movie is a very different one, that's what I think it's a book purist. People who will never be able to enjoy the movie because while they are watching them they keep thinking "that's different", "that's not in the book", "that should be blue, not pink"... I think people should go to the cinema with an open mind and enjoy the movie just for what it is. No one knows more about the books than Jo, and she loves the movies so... :)Avatar Image says: Heehee,, I've Already Commented this twice! Now I'm just commenting to see what time over there :D xxxAvatar Image says: What is a "book purist"? LOL pardon my ignoranceAvatar Image says: Just a quick comment about the color of Hermione's dress: I understand that movies and books are two totally different things, and things will be cut out, but needlessly changing tiny things (like the color of her dress) is a little strange to me. Having a blue dress isn't going to take up any more film time than having a pink dress. *shrug* That's just what I think. Byebye! :)Avatar Image says: Loz, I didn't know the Herald Sun was a man! How can a newspaper have a man-crush.....? LOL! Another good interview from Dan. WB should be on their knees thanking the gods that they hired the right people to be in these movies. It takes energy and endless patience to do the job and put up with the fans and the press!Avatar Image says: Thank god, I'm not a purist. They can be so annoying with their nitpicking sometimes.Avatar Image says: I'm not a purist ,I don't mind if they change the movies up and stuff, i know they are two different things. I just don't like the movies because they suck, not because they are different from the books. All i want is a good movie, with good acting (some of the actors performances are perfect, but some are just cringeworthy) Avatar Image says: I must admit that I'm a purist and sometimes get a bit put out when important things are taken out of the HP films and unnecessary things are put in. After all, look how Peter Jackson managed to make such perfect adaptations of LotR. Yes, they were different from the books but nothing truly important was left out like they were with the Potter films. That said, no matter how much I wish they were longer and more true to the books, I still love them and watch them regularly. They are my comfort films. The ones I go to when I've had the worst day or am sick and need something to make me feel better. Of course I rag on them constantly but it's done out of love and I couldn't imagine not having them there for me.Avatar Image says: First time posting here, so I hope people don't mind a new comer jumping in :) I really like the way Dan put it. I love the books and absolutely understand the disappointment at having certain scenes changed or deleted. The first time I saw OOTP that's what threw me, but I agree that you have to view the films and the books separately. Sometimes what's written down simply doesn't flow the same way on screen (that and filming all of that book with no cuts would have meant a 5 hour long movie!). Keeping that in mind, I saw OOTP again with a different group of friends, and it has since eclipsed Azkaban as my favorite Potter film :)Avatar Image says: oh that dan....Avatar Image says: I just hope that, expecially the Deathly Hallows two, the films are the most similar to the books as possible. sorry for my english, i'm italian and sooo tired tonight.Avatar Image says: man the DAMN movies suck . if u cant put it all in its just SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Avatar Image says: "Sometimes what’s written down simply doesn’t flow the same way on screen" posted by HGRHfan I totally agree. I think that with certain scenes from GOF (a couple of tasks) and OOtP (Ministry) especially. So I am generally ok with changes made. The one thing I don't like about the films though is when they change things unnecessarily, for example the Quidditch World Cup forest scene (the forest that appears in DH too) was changed into something else, just as long a scene but a totally different one. And adding extra meaningless scenes like in POA Buckbeak flying across the lake and the crying on the rock scenes. Avatar Image says: I'm just going to chime in quickly here. I've posted about this issue before, but I'll try to do a quick recap. A lot of people seem upset about the idea of putting in new scenes at all in a film adaptation of the Potter books. They don't mind losing a little bit of story in order to fit a time-frame, but are furious if that lost bit of story is replaced by something new or altered. Now, I subscribe to the belief that if all a person wants up on the screen is exactly what is in the book, then they should simply read the book. I understand that some people want non-Potter fans to understand why they love the series, and believe that forcing more and more information down an audiences throat would allow them to basically experience the book itself. Not really true. A non-book fan will only appreciate the series on a certain level, that's just the way it is. So why not at least make it enjoyable for that non-book fan? I, personally, love to see new scenes added to the story, partly because if I wanted to see an exact film version of the book I would simply gaze into my own mind while I was reading the book...those mental images would constitute an exact interpretation. Also, the idea of adding a new scene in place of older material is not always just some cheap ploy...sometimes, if a screenwriter is adapting some material to film form, and they realize that they can't include a number of scenes because of a time issue, they form a completely new scene that does the job of combining the revelation of all the plot points from the other scenes. That means it will be different than the book, condensed and diluted, but still contain all the necessary information. If you want to show the audience that the wizarding world is engaged in all out war with Voldemort now, but can't include the Prime Minister scene with Fudge, or all the news reports of disappearances and attacks, or all the expository scenes where it is revealed what the bad guys are up to, you can simply fashion a new scene, like the attack on the burrow, which showcases all of those ideas. It's simplified, yes. It's not very subtle, true. But it gets the job done, and sad to say, that's what most movies have to do...get the job done, fairly quickly and efficiently. They are a visual medium and always have been...if a character in a book is sad and lonely, we can spend three or four pages seeing that characters internal thoughts, their dreams and wishes...but in a movie, if a character is sad and lonely, they either have to say out loud "I'm sad and lonely" (which sounds like blatent exposition), or we have to hear their thoughts in an echoey way, or, what happens most of the time, is that the screenwriter writes, "Harry looks sad and lonely", and the director films Daniel Radcliffe looking sad and lonely, and what was once three pages of the book now becomes 10 seconds long. That's how the transition works. As to those who say Peter Jackson is the perfect guy to do an adaptation, hmm...some of you haven't been to the Lord of the Rings fans websites. There are many LOTR fans who were perfectly outraged by the changes or shortcuts Jackson made to the book, just like the Potter fans. They were upset that a character portrayed as being able to resist temptation in the books, Faramir, couldn't do so in the movie. They were upset at the addition of many facets of Arwen's character, who doesn't do much of anything in the books but is all over the place in the films. So, just so you guys realize that. Avatar Image says: Just a quick little addition to the above post. There are a few scenes that I felt should have been in the films in some form, that I was upset about. I personally feel that the worst omission happened in Prisoner of Azkaban, where it is never revealed how Mooney, Padfoot, Wormtail and Prongs are (that would have taken about 10 seconds at the end, if Lupin pointed out as he was packing his things that he had helped create the map with Harry's father, Sirius and Peter. And right after that moment, once Harry learned that his father's nickname had been Prongs, either he or Lupin could have made the connection between that and Harry's stag patronus. That would have taken about 30 seconds, tops, and it wouldn't have overburdened the average audience member. That's one scene that, for the life of me, I can't understand them removing. Avatar Image says: I plan to reserve judgement on the new burrow scene until I've actually seen it. What I hope they avoid are the pointless scenes (cough cough POA). Let's not waste valuable time with closeups of the whomping willow or random crows. Just because a shot looks good doesn't mean you should use it. Avatar Image says: i'm a book purist, and i know that the movies can't really satisfy the people like us. But i have to say i really like the movies, and even though i wish they could add other stuff in them it's really hard to fit big books in 2 hour movies (max.) so i think everyone should respect the whole-package that comes in making a book-based movie. Avatar Image says: And now I am completely confused. How can this movie be that dark and still be only PG rated?Avatar Image says: The Herald is up to it's usual incorrect form - How the Prince's book "seemingly explains the past that will help him battle with Lord Voldemort" I'll never know Thanks fairfax media - once again, your thorough research pays off! How can we trust the rest of the article when you can't even get basic plot facts correct? PLEASE feel free to shoot me down - if anyone can explain how Harry ever thought Advanced Potion Making (even the Prince's copy) would help him defeat Mouldyvort - please let me know! I know this seems like a trifle compared to the massive movie vs. book debate currently going here (which i might add has been done to death anyway, and I say "each to their own!! If we all like the same stuff the world would be a totally boring place to be") HOWEVER I still stick to the one remark - how can we trust the rest of the article? Have they misquoted Dan? do they really understand what he is trying to get across in his message? what snippets of the interview ended up on the editing floor. I myself have interviewed a famous person (not as lofty as Dan's profile, but most UK people would know him) and there was alot of back and forth on it, trying to clarify context, get quotes right and decide what stays and what goes. How do we trust any cutting and rearranging done by those who have "lost the plot" so to speak? How do we know the most intersting parts of the article (to Potter Fans, not regular Muggles) aren't edited out??.....Avatar Image says: I know the article isn't entirely accurate, but the Dan quotes sound like him, just from hearing and reading so many of his interviews. It sounds intelligent thus, it's Daniel lol. Avatar Image says: Like many previous commentators I agree that film and literature are two different media and it would be pointless to expect an exact translation from book to movie. My biggest concern is when a character and what he/she represents gets lost. Ron has been reduced to hopeless, whimpy sidekick from PoA onwards. When Cuaron/Kloves decided to turn bookish, tough Hermione into super-Hermione in PoA, one of the key scenes they changed was 'The Shrieking Shack' where Ron (in the book) stands up on a broken leg to defend Harry. In the movie Ron's line is given to Hermione while Ron's sitting pathetically in a corner hanging on to Scabbers. This was done without any replacement scene to show that Ron is in fact brave (except when it comes to spiders lol). I understand that Ron is used (even more than in the books) as comedic relief and that's fine, but those very important sides of him, as the heart of the trio (in JKR's words), Harry's best friend and number one defender is lost. Watching the movies you'd almost think Hermione is closer to Harry than Ron. Does this make me a book purist? I don't necessarily think so, I just don't think that a character's essential function in the story should be lost and I don't understand why there's a problem with that in the movies (Ron is the most obvious example).Avatar Image says: Yeah they do get darker and darker. I can't wait for the last one!Avatar Image says: As a purist, I love to hate the films. Essentially, they've destroyed what I loved most about the books -- the realism of the magic world with their traditions, histories, and character, the friendship of the Trio, and the themes of racism that is so like our own world. The movies are nothing like that. Anyway, I don't blame Warner Brothers, as much as I like to insult them. They are taking this cash cow, and maximizing their profits by giving audiences what they want: instant-Romance/Comedy/Action with a twist -- Magic. It's not WB's fault that the larger population can't seem to appreciate depth in films.Avatar Image says: Karin, Thank you, cause I'm on my lunch break and now I don't have to say anything..... You hit the nail on the head for me....Avatar Image says: But to add, I don't have any issues with Hermione or Harry, but darn it if they didn't mess with Ron... But that's ok, RG works that thing out anyway!!!!Avatar Image says: Gotta love these reporters..... "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince sees Potter return for his sixth year at Hogwarts where he discovers a book that seemingly explains the past that will help him battle with Lord Voldemort. " So Harrys potions book is going to help him defeat Voldie by showing him the past....hmmmmm??? Bless,someone should have read a book first :-) Looking forward to July! Only 185 days to go :)Avatar Image says: You got it exactly right, Karin. PoA was a beautiful movie. No one can argue that. It was a cinematically stunning film. Unfortunately, the characters and plot were horrifically skewered. Even were I not a huge Ron fan, I would be horrified by what he was turned into in that film. I mean, Hermione was his bodyguard against Malfoy in front of the Shrieking Shack on the Hogsmeade trip. What is that about? I know several people who started reading the books because they were utterly confused by that movie and wanted to know what in heck was going on. It's great that they got into the books but they shouldn't have to read it in order to figure out what was going on in the movie. A movie is a multi-level experience. A beautiful movie does not a good movie make. Cuaron (and I do enjoy his other work) should have placed the plot and the characters on the same level of importance as he placed the cinematography. Both are essential. (And don't even get me started on that ending!)Avatar Image says: You're always going to have that group of folks who never like books turned into films, yet they keep going to see them. It's mind boggling. If you can't separate the two, which isn't to say you can't be upset if one of your favorite parts of the book is left out, then why would you keep shelling out $10 or $12 for movies tickets?Avatar Image says: um...i liked the interview material with dan but i got the feeling that the author didn't know much about it. i don't know why, i just thought that. god, that's so embarassing, we (by this i mean americans) are crap at english accents:)Avatar Image says: someone brought up the dress thing, and i thought i'd comment there. i always thought it was interesting that hermione never wore dress robes in the films, but did in the books. and then, in dh, mione wore a dress, which always reminded me of the one she wore in the GoF film. i always thought that how they did the costumes in the films was kinda odd. it was weird to me how the minister of magic wore a sterotypical buissness-man suit in 5. i dunno, i'm just weird and notice this kinda thing:):):)Avatar Image says: For me, part of me wants to be a book purist because I think that if the movies were done exactly like the books they'd be just as good (if not better) but obviously this isn't possible and I've gotten over the fact that they are different for the most part. I've come to consider the movies as a form of FANFICTION in that they are essentially fans of the books making their on interpretation/adaptation of them and often times it won't stick to canon but the basic elements are there.Avatar Image says: Posted by kay on January 12, 2009: "god, that’s so embarassing, we (by this i mean americans) are crap at english accents:)" LOL yes, we most definitely are!! ;-) Avatar Image says: For the record I dislike Ron as a character, I want to slap him a lot, but it's not due to the films. I do agree with DeliaDee re Ron's film character, though it's actually COS when I noticed how pathetically whimpering he is made to be, so I don't blame Cuaron. It does get worse in POA (still one of my two favourite HP films) but better in GOF and OotP; in GOF he is just as petulant as he came across in the books, perfect. There wasn't enough of him in OotP. His reduction to a comic sidekick does take away some of the less pleasant aspects of his character, which they are going to have to improve on in time for DH when he most definitely isn't comic. Avatar Image says: I can't wait till HBP comes out!!! I hope it lives up to the books and isn't too dark. I can't wait to see the love triangle between hermione,ron and lavender and the stuff between harry and ginny. i have been a fan of Harry potter books and movies for liek ages and can't wait till HBP comes out at the cinema!!! will be there on the first day to watch it!!! Avatar Image says: Oh no. This is the first time I think I don't like Dan. Bummer. The dude seems smug about his "movies" and condescending to "purists". Films, of course are not replicas of the entire book, but if I could have it that way - then yeah! I guess I'm a purist who will never be satisfied. I love the books. And I will see the films (as dark as they get) one way or another, because just like Snape loved Evans - I always hope they'll turn around to me. I wish the films were just like the books. I admit it. And David Yates sucks, the order of the Phoenix sucked big time. So - yeah Dan, I guess you can presuppose I won't like the next 3 films. Try to understand why instead of whipping us for it.Avatar Image says: I think that the books are still much darker than the films no matter what they say!....I mean they left out all the dark stuff out in OOTP!...I found the intense scenes boring!....And actually the only people that likes Yates directing are well....confused!....I hate the fact yates is directing the last films!Avatar Image says: I don't think I'm a book purist but it does annoy me when the movies contain inaccuracies. I wouldn't mind the director adding stuff as long as it follows JK's rules for the magical world. However, after the second movie, the movies have seem too rushed, with some unnecesary scenes added. For instance, In GOF, the movie shows Harry and the order members flying quite low, in full view of muggles. The battle with the dragon on Hogwart's roof was too lengthy. Also, the clothing has grown to be too mugglish. In POA, the actors are wearing jeans and T shirts most of the time. I know it's challenging to include everything in the movies. But it's not quite Harry Potter if you don't follow the magical world's rules. I think most of the actors are doing a fantastic job, especially the ones that play Hagrid, Snape, Ron Hermione and Harry. But Michael Gambon must do some research on his character. Dumbledore wouldn't push Harry back and scream "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET?!??!?!" Avatar Image says: POA and vision. That scene with Buckbeak dying and Ron's face, and Hermione starting to cry and going to Ron and then Harry holding her. Said more to me about how important Ron is to this Trio than words could. Its forever in my soul, that vision. The flying across the Lake on Buckbeak. Harry wants to live and love. I saw it. I saw him yell for joy and smile. I heard the music and thought about Harry and his father, and how both Potter men would have died for Sirius. I could go on but it's late. Maybe a little silver doe or forest again or that scene with Harry dying to defend Sirius, or jumping out and defending Sirius and living. Or maybe to celebrate Obama, watch JKR at Harvard! Avatar Image says: There are always going to be things you're disappointed didn't make it into the film (HP6 and HP7 are my favorites of the whole series, so I know there will be a letdown or two). At the same time, any film adaptation of any book is going to be at least a little different from how you pictured it in your head, so it really is best to take it with a grain of salt.Avatar Image says: Purists are one thing... It doesn't have to be a 1:1 changeover to stay faithful, but anyone who really thinks those movies have really been faithful to the books is in denial... From "Hermione has to know and explain everything" to mr "Actors should never research the source material" dumbledore... And the best player in the last movie was... That's right, a FAN. Evanna Lynch's Luna was the only thing keeping Order from being a complete stinkbomb. Well, that and the Dumbledore vs Voldemort fight which was freaking awesome. It was a deviation from the book that worked. They could have made these movies 3 hour movies like the Lord of the Rings movies, and they could have fixed the glaring problems and despite cutting a lot of things out still, they could keep important things they left out, but they chose to make the movies short (except for Chris Columbus, and I'm glad he was so adamant about getting as much as he could into it, even if his crew was responsible for some of the more infamous changes) and GoF and OotP suffer from being barely coherent bits of fluff suffering from the gaping wound of missing narrative... I'm watching the movies for Luna, now. Evanna Lynch is the magical piece, and the only thing that will let me get any sort of joy out of the last 3 movies.Avatar ImageSylvieTheHufflepuff says: There's been lots of Dan interviews lately... they're all about Eqqus. Eugh. More Potter = more fun.

Write a Reply or Comment

Finding Hogwarts

The Leaky Cauldron is not associated with J.K. Rowling, Warner Bros., or any of the individuals or companies associated with producing and publishing Harry Potter books and films.